Civilization & Thought The term Democracy originates from the Greek word Demokratia which is broken down to Demos which means people, and Kratia which means rule. Although Greece can claim they developed the concept of democracy, they did not always follow democratic rule. Military rule sometimes took over. There is still some debate about which country can be considered the oldest democratic country in history. However, the first documented model was in Athens, which was also followed by other Greek cities. They followed direct democracy, which meant that citizens were allowed to attend council meetings and vote on laws without being represented by an official they elected. This form of government is hard to follow in larger communities. It seemed too good to be true, and it was. The publics opinion was often controlled by the comic poets at the theatres (Henderson) . In addition, women, foreigners, and slaves were not allowed to vote. Only men over the age of 18, who had completed military training, could vote. There were three political bodies where voters gathered. The largest being the Assembly where officials were elected or chosen by lottery, and executive pronouncements were made, such as a declaration of war. Second, was the council which rotated its president monthly amongst the 10 tribes of a noble Athenian family. The president held the keys to the treasury and seal to the city. The third form of political body was the Court, where legal matters were handled and political criminals were tried. All in all, despite being a huge step forward in political history, Athenian democracy and their constitution was far from perfect. In fact, it was prejudice towards women, foreigners, and slaves. In my opinion, after looking closely at Athenian democracy we can see that it was not a true democracy, because people were given the illusion of power when in fact they were being steered and controlled. By definition democracy is a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state. In such a system the people have the power to put limitations on their government and not the other way around. Also, democracy goes hand in hand with equality and it is obvious that did not exist in their laws. This is a major reason this system has not survived. The second type of democracy is known as Representative, or indirect democracy. It was so named because the public elected a number of people that would represent and make decisions for them in council meetings. The first government to have a representative democracy was the Roman Republic, even though it did have a form of direct democracy in the Roman assemblies. Today's modern representative democracies imitate more the Roman than the Greek models because it was a state in which supreme power was held by the people and their elected representatives, and which had an elected or nominated leader. (Watson, 2005
) Robert Michels argued that most representative systems deteriorate towards an oligarchy, which means that all the power falls into the hands of a small number of people. This is known as The iron law of oligarchy. It states that ruling by an elite is inevitable in democratic organizations, due to the fact that elected officials are almost always wealthier than the people they represent. This means, in certain matters, electives may make decisions that are biased by choosing their own best interests over that of the peoples. Also, electives arent held accountable for the decisions they make aside from losing a re-election. On the other hand, there are a number of advantages to having a representative democracy. For example, representatives are more informed with the issues they are voting about. Citizens may not be able to study all aspects of the issues they are facing. Also, representative governments are much more efficient and less expensive. It would be very costly and time consuming to hold meetings for all citizens, especially in countries with populations in millions. Adolf Gasser studied both stable and unstable representative democracies. He wrote a list of requirements needed to have a stable and successful representative democracy. They are as follows: 1. Society has to be built up from bottom to top. As a consequence, society is built up by people, who are free and have the power to defend themselves with weapons. 2. These free people join or form local communities. These local communities are independent, which includes financial independence, and they are free to determine their own rules. 3. Local communities join together into a higher unit e.g. a canton. 4. There is no hierarchical bureaucracy. 5. There is competition between these local communities e.g. on services delivered or on taxes. Democracy has survived and is implemented in many of our governments today. The US and the EU have always been strong advocates of democracy. They have fought wars and intervened in other countries under the banner of spreading democracy, the cure to all issues and problems these countries were facing. Examples include Palestine, Egypt, and Iraq. Their solution is always to enforce their model of democracy on every country facing political instability. However, every country has different needs. Every nationality has different values and their governments should be tailored to fit their specific needs. The EU should focus on small changes through the articulations being made by and between different elements in Middle Eastern societies. EU actors need to consider how change occurs under different conditions, and must acknowledge how people in the Middle East come to identify as democrats in their own context. This will require some reflexivity on the part of EU actors over what they seek to promote by promoting a European model of democracy, particularly in the context of the Middle East where such a model clearly has not worked. Unless the EU moves away from such aspect blindness, it cannot move on to new ideas on how best to support change in the region. (Pace 2009)
Other models have been proposed, such as Stochocracy which is very similar to representative democracy only differing in the method that representatives are chosen. Stochocracy proposes that choosing by lottery prevents putting people with political agendas in positions of power. However, it is highly doubtful that this model could be effective considering that a vast majority of people are not educated enough or could not be bothered to assume the role they are chosen for. It also does not prevent these representatives from pursuing agendas while in power by being bribed by corporations and so on. The frequency of failure in applying democracy raises this question: Is democracy the solution to the entire worlds political instability? The answer, in my opinion, is no. It is not a universal cure. There is no such thing as a flawless form of democracy, because there is not one country that truly enforces it. It is nice to believe that we are the ones making decisions in our own lives but that is not the case. We are given the choice of who represents us, but how is that helpful when the only candidates that make it through are the ones backed by corporate funding? The vast numbers and expenses required to compose a government make it impossible to eradicate corruption. It is in fact a utopian dream that one day governments will be run by people who make unbiased decisions. Until that day there is no type of democracy that will be effective so long as these unethical people are put in positions of power.
References: 1. Henderson Comic Hero versus Political Elite. 2. Watson 2005 3. Robert Michels Political Parties 4. Adolf Gasser Gemeindefreiheit als Rettung Europas. 5. Pace 2009